9th Circuit Court of Appeals (32 summaries)
Korab v. Fink
A state does not commit a violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment by not filling the gap left 鈥渂y Congress鈥檚 withdrawal of federal funding for Compact of Free Association with the United States residents.鈥
Area(s) of Law:- Civil Rights 搂 1983
Huang v. Holder
The Court of Appeals deferred to the adverse credibility ruling of the Immigration Judge against an asylum applicant whose testimony was determined to be not credible and who failed to provide 鈥渞easonably obtainable corroborating evidence鈥 of her testimony.
Area(s) of Law:- Immigration
Tadevosyan v. Holder
The Board of Immigration Appeals abused its discretion in denying a motion to reopen because it failed to analyze the DHS鈥檚 opposition to the motion, apply the motion to the reopen standard, or provide a reasoned explanation for its decision.
Area(s) of Law:- Immigration
Nakano v. United States
Under 26 U.S.C. 搂 6672, assets are 鈥渆ncumbered鈥 only if the taxpayer has a legal obligation to use the funds for a purpose that is superior to the interests of the Internal Revenue Service, and the Air Transportation Safety and System Stabilization Act did not affect the bankrupt taxpayer鈥檚 obligation to remit the excise tax to the federal government.
Area(s) of Law:- Tax Law
Negrete-Ramirez v. Holder
The bar for seeking a waiver for inadmissibility under Immigration and Nationality Act 搂 212(h) 鈥渄oes not apply to persons who adjusted to lawful permanent resident status after having entered into the United States by inspection.鈥
Area(s) of Law:- Immigration
Graham-Sult v. Clainos
California鈥檚 anti-SLAPP statute applies to actions involving 鈥渨ritten or oral statement[s] or writing[s] made in connection鈥 to probate court.
Area(s) of Law:- First Amendment
Lee v. Intelius Inc.
A plaintiff has not entered into a contract to arbitrate with a third party when the third party is insufficiently identified as a contracting party; even if the plaintiff has entered into a contract to purchase, under the Federal Arbitration Act the plaintiff has not entered into a contract to arbitrate.
Area(s) of Law:- Arbitration
Urooj v. Holder
The Department of Homeland Security cannot use impeachment evidence alone to 鈥渆stablish the grounds鈥 for the termination of asylum status 鈥渂y a preponderance of the evidence.鈥
Area(s) of Law:- Immigration
Rodriguez-Castellon v. Holder
A lawful permanent resident convicted under California Penal Code 搂 288(c)(1) has been convicted of an 鈥渁ggravated felony鈥 as defined in 8 U.S.C. 搂 1101(a)(43)(F) and is removable under 8 U.S.C. 搂 1227(a)(2)(A)(iii).
Area(s) of Law:- Immigration
Dexter v. Colvin
An applicant has a "colorable constitutional claim" of a violation of due process if an administrative law judge does not address all of the applicant's reasons for good cause when denying the applicant's request for a hearing about the untimely filing of a social security benefits application.
Area(s) of Law:- Administrative Law
Gutierrez v. Holder
When an alien is 鈥渟ubject to an extant withholding of removal,鈥 the Department of Homeland Security may file a Notice to Appear, and there does not need to be a separate hearing; the government must demonstrate the grounds for the termination of withholding of removal by a preponderance of evidence.
Area(s) of Law:- Immigration
Bell v. Uribe
Overlapping claims under federal and state law may be considered adjudicated even if one is not specifically addressed by a lower court; a juror who does independent research and shares that research to be relied upon by the other jurors in violation of the judge's order acts improperly and may be dismissed.
Area(s) of Law:- Habeas Corpus
United States v. Humphries
鈥淒isposal鈥 of hazardous waste under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, 42 U.S.C. 搂 6928, begins with an 鈥渁ct of disposal,鈥 not an individual鈥檚 鈥渟ubjective decision to dispose.鈥
Area(s) of Law:- Environmental Law
Duenas-Alvarez v. Holder
A lawful permanent resident is removable for the offense of taking a vehicle without consent, in violation of California Vehicle Code 搂 10851(a), because it is considered a 鈥渢heft offense鈥 that qualifies as an aggravated felony under 8 U.S.C. 搂 1101(a)(43).
Area(s) of Law:- Immigration
Lagstein v. Certain Underwriters
A plaintiff that is awarded an arbitration award including interest on contract damages is not precluded from a district court also awarding interest on the remaining portions of the arbitration award, and Nevada law allows a plaintiff to collect 鈥減ost-award, pre-judgment interest on the non-contract damages portions of the arbitration award from the date of the awards through the date of payment鈥 as well as attorney鈥檚 fees.
Area(s) of Law:- Attorney Fees
Vitug v. Holder
The Board of Immigration Appeals shall not engage in its own factfinding or ignore the immigration judge鈥檚 factual findings that were key to the holding.
Area(s) of Law:- Immigration
Zadrozny v. Bank of New York Mellon
Non-judicial foreclosures do not need to comport with the Uniform Commercial Code or do they require the production of the promissory note before a sale, and successor trustees are not unauthorized to initiate foreclosure proceedings.
Area(s) of Law:- Consumer Credit
Sola v. Holder
When the Immigration Judge or Board of Immigration Appeals could have addressed a claim, the claim does not fall within the exhaustion exception for constitutional challenges to immigration laws and procedures, and the Ninth Circuit will dismiss the claim for lack of jurisdiction.
Area(s) of Law:- Immigration
Higher Taste, Inc. v. City of Tacoma
For the purposes of 42 U.S.C. 搂 1988, a party may be considered the prevailing party if a preliminary injunction is granted, based on a finding that the party was likely to succeed on the merits, even if a settlement was reached before final adjudication.
Area(s) of Law:- Attorney Fees
Mendoza-Alvarez v. Holder
Insulin-dependent persons, including those who suffer from mental illness, do not qualify as a protected social group because the group does not contain sufficient particularity.
Area(s) of Law:- Immigration
Rodriguez v. Robbins
District court鈥檚 grant of a preliminary injunction, which required 鈥渢he government to identify all class members, detained pursuant to 8 U.S.C. 搂搂 1226(c) and 1225(b) 鈥 and 鈥榩rovide each of them with a bond hearing before an Immigration Judge with power to grant their release鈥欌 was upheld.
Area(s) of Law:- Immigration
Li v. Kerry
The district court properly dismissed the plaintiffs鈥 claims when there was no 鈥渓ive case or controversy鈥 about visa cut-off dates and allocation of visa numbers, and when the plaintiffs did not allege that the 鈥渄efendants failed to take discrete actions they were legally required to take.鈥
Area(s) of Law:- Administrative Law
Mashiri v. Department of Education
The decision by the Department of Education to deny a Stafford loan to an alien awaiting a grant of asylum was proper since the alien could not provide evidence from the Immigration and Naturalization Service that he was not in the United States temporarily.
Area(s) of Law:- Immigration
Gonzalez-Cervantes v. Holder
There is no 鈥渞ealistic probability鈥 that California courts would apply Cal. Penal Code 搂 243.4(e) to conduct that does not meet the generic federal definition of 鈥渕oral turpitude.鈥
Area(s) of Law:- Immigration
United States v. Stone
The Supreme Court鈥檚 holding in Flores-Figueroa v. United States does not change the Ninth Circuit鈥檚 holding 鈥渢hat the government need not prove that a defendant knew the firearm or ammunition had traveled in interstate commerce in order to obtain鈥 a conviction under 18 U.S.C. 搂 922(g)(1) because the interstate commerce portion is merely jurisdictional.
Area(s) of Law:- Criminal Law
Alphonsus v. Holder
The Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) must explain its basis for using the 鈥渙rderly pursuit of justice鈥 and 鈥渕eaningful risk of harm鈥 rationales in determining that an individual committed a particularly serious crime before the BIA鈥檚 determination can be evaluated for its legal adequacy.
Area(s) of Law:- Immigration
Arteaga-De Alvarez v. Holder
The Ninth Circuit does not have jurisdiction over a plaintiff鈥檚 claim that she did not receive due process because her request for cancellation of removal was denied even though her husband鈥檚 cancellation of removal request had been granted based on similar circumstances. The Board of Immigration Appeal (BIA) 鈥渃ommitted an error of law鈥 when it relied on a categorical rule that the 鈥渁vailability of alternative relief necessarily undercuts a cancellation of removal claim of hardship to the applicant鈥檚 qualifying relative.鈥
Area(s) of Law:- Immigration
Pouncil v. Tilton
A plaintiff鈥檚 2008 claims under the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act and the First Amendment, founded upon the denial of his requests for a conjugal visit with his wife, were based on an independent act, and therefore were not time-barred and 鈥減ursuant to the same regulation鈥 of his previously denied request for a conjugal visit in 2002.
Area(s) of Law:- Civil Law
Garfias-Rodriguez v. Holder
If a prior ruling of the Ninth Circuit conflicts with a reasonable interpretation of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) by the Board of Immigration Appeals鈥 (BIA), the Ninth Circuit will defer to the BIA鈥檚 interpretation, which can be retroactively applied.
Area(s) of Law:- Immigration
Miles v. Martel
Under 28 U.S.C. 搂 2254(d), a federal court can remand a claim of a person in state custody for an evidentiary hearing for the purpose of reviewing that claim.
Area(s) of Law:- Criminal Procedure
Sheppard v. Evans and Assoc.
The Federal Civil Procedure Rule 8(a)(2)鈥檚 pleading standard can be satisfied for a complaint of wrongful discharge under Oregon law and age discrimination based on circumstantial evidence if the complaint establishes a prima facie case of age discrimination and alleges that the plaintiff was fired after requesting Family Medical Leave.
Area(s) of Law:- Civil Procedure
Cheema v. Holder
The written advisals on the I-589 asylum application form gives applicants adequate notice of the repercussions of 鈥渒nowingly filing a frivolous asylum application鈥 and, as required by 8 U.S.C. 搂 1158(d)(4)(A), of the privilege of having representation by counsel.
Area(s) of Law:- Immigration